Do self-supervised speech models develop human-like perception biases?
This addresses the problem of understanding model biases for researchers in speech processing, but it is incremental as it compares existing models without proposing new methods.
The study investigated whether self-supervised speech models develop human-like native language biases in their representational spaces, finding that CPC shows a small effect while wav2vec 2.0 and HuBERT develop universal, non-language-specific spaces.
Self-supervised models for speech processing form representational spaces without using any external labels. Increasingly, they appear to be a feasible way of at least partially eliminating costly manual annotations, a problem of particular concern for low-resource languages. But what kind of representational spaces do these models construct? Human perception specializes to the sounds of listeners' native languages. Does the same thing happen in self-supervised models? We examine the representational spaces of three kinds of state-of-the-art self-supervised models: wav2vec 2.0, HuBERT and contrastive predictive coding (CPC), and compare them with the perceptual spaces of French-speaking and English-speaking human listeners, both globally and taking account of the behavioural differences between the two language groups. We show that the CPC model shows a small native language effect, but that wav2vec 2.0 and HuBERT seem to develop a universal speech perception space which is not language specific. A comparison against the predictions of supervised phone recognisers suggests that all three self-supervised models capture relatively fine-grained perceptual phenomena, while supervised models are better at capturing coarser, phone-level, effects of listeners' native language, on perception.